Olive Oil Classification and Fraud Detection Using E-Nose and Ultrasonic System

The increasing interest of people for consumption of safe food has necessitated the research on fraud detection in foods. In this research, fraud samples of extra virgin olive oil were detected by fusion of E-nose and ultrasound systems. The data were analyzed with seven different classification alg...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Food analytical methods 2021-10, Vol.14 (10), p.2199-2210
Main Authors: Zarezadeh, Mohammad Reza, Aboonajmi, Mohammad, Varnamkhasti, Mahdi Ghasemi, Azarikia, Fatemeh
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Algorithms
Analytical Chemistry
Chemistry
Chemistry and Materials Science
Chemistry/Food Science
Classification
Electronic noses
Food consumption
Food Science
Fraud
Gas sensors
Microbiology
Olive oil
Principal components analysis
Ultrasonic imaging
Ultrasound
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The increasing interest of people for consumption of safe food has necessitated the research on fraud detection in foods. In this research, fraud samples of extra virgin olive oil were detected by fusion of E-nose and ultrasound systems. The data were analyzed with seven different classification algorithms and the samples were prepared in six levels of fraud. The principal component analysis was used for feature reduction and seven different classification models were also used for classification and fraud detection. Based on the results, the most effective features in classification were “losses in ultrasound wave amplitude percentage,” “ultrasound signal’s time of flight,” and “difference between maximum and minimum output of TGS2620 gas sensor,” respectively. As well, the results indicated that the Gradient Boosting Classifier (GBC) model represented the best classification accuracy (97.75%) which had the maximum calculation time, compared with the other methods. Furthermore, both NaïveBayes and linear SVM methods were found to be effective methods (95.51%) after GBC.
ISSN:1936-9751
1936-976X
DOI:10.1007/s12161-021-02035-y